Richard, I like your approach, reply to everyone at least once per day. I
exclude people who have said they don't read my posts. Or people who almost
never reply to my posts. Except when I want to "set the record straight."
You could write a book about all this. Do you know, there is almost no research
about online communication. And even less about online "communities." There's a
niche calling out for someone to claim it (-:
On Monday, September 29, 2014 1:02 PM, "'Richard J. Williams'
pundits...@gmail.com [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
On 9/29/2014 9:27 AM, Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote:
>salyavin, I thought Buck was addressing Richard in general. What makes you
>think it's about what Rick posts?! I'm confused...
>
>
Welcome to the club! Where is Judy when we need her? How did he get in here?
What!?
So, I try to respond to everyone on FFL at least once a day so
they don't feel neglected - I'm a big supporter of online
discussions and distance learning - it should be democratic. This
is supposed to be an online conversation. There's one informant on
<alt.buddha.big.fat.guy> that I've been debating since 1997.
Go figure.
>
>
>On Monday, September 29, 2014 9:24 AM, salyavin808 <no_re...@yahoogroups.com>
>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote :
>
>
>The
rule defines consent as "an affirmative, conscious and voluntary agreement.”
>
>
>Towards a greater clarity in FFL forum discussion I feel we should adopt the
>California decorum for discussion and drop away from the Texas norm.
>
>Silence should no longer mean agreement here and that Henceforth and Forever
>more in the discussions on FF,
>
>
>that
silence or a lack of resistance do not in fact constitute consent.
>
>
>What do you feel about this?
>
>
>
>
>I "feel" you are trying to stifle debate again.
>
>
>If people didn't think things worth sharing they wouldn't send them to Rick.
>
>
>Do you think Wikileaks should have been shut down? Of course not.
>
>
>
>
>Jai Guru Dev,
>-Buck in the Dome
>
>
>
>
